Great to hear, Rosie! 🙏

Dank voor het lezen, Peter!

Big thank you to @leaypi.bsky.social for taking the time to talk to me.

Next week’s conversation is with @drodrik.bsky.social so stay tuned!

/end

If you care about craft, risk, or how writing can bridge philosophy & literature, this conversation is for you.

Read it here:

catherineeunicedevries.substack.com/p/etched-in-...

And if you take one idea with you, let it be this:
Clarity doesn’t begin with knowing, it begins in questioning.

7/

The thing she would etch in marble:
“Socrates’ reminder: I know that I don’t know.”

Not as humility alone, but as a method.

Writing becomes the place where ideas are tested, unsettled, rebuilt, never final, always in pursuit of knowledge.

6/

Despite the leap into literature, Ypi still plans with a philosopher’s discipline.

Blueprint first, prose second.

The structure is the scaffolding, but the spark comes only once she’s already in motion.

Writing is a combination of “discipline and grace,” according to Ypi.

5/

Her book Free was another step into exposure.

Not in terms of argument, but autobiography.

What some saw as risk, she saw as clarity: Ideas are more accountable when we reveal what shaped them.

4/

While academic writing often assumes shared premises, public writing does not.

“You don’t start from where everyone is,” Ypi told me. “You build from the ground up.”

It’s slower, more vulnerable, but also more rewarding.

3/

Ypi began as a child writing poems in Albania.

Philosophy sharpened her rigor, but also muted her creative voice.

It took Brexit, a pandemic, & a sense of civic urgency for her to return to writing without a safety net.

She gave herself permission to take risks.

2/

Respecting the marble means respecting the grain.

Writing is the same. Feeling stuck isn’t a verdict. It’s a sign that you need a skeleton.

Link: catherineeunicedevries.substack.com/p/feeling-st...

Big thanks to @simonkuper.bsky.social & @abenewman.bsky.social for sharing their thoughts

/end

In the post, I share a short guide for academics who want to shift from outcome-driven to process-driven writing:

- Make a skeleton
- Stress-test claims
- Let the skeleton evolve
- Revise skeleton before writing
- Draft with restraint, then edit

10/

Abe Newman once explained the difference as: logic of discovery vs logic of presentation.

Drafting = discovery (messy)

Revising = presentation (legible)

Getting stuck usually means you’re trying to present before you’ve fully discovered.

catherineeunicedevries.substack.com/p/etched-in-...

9/

The skeleton exposes everything:

- Where the logic wobbles.
- Where evidence thins.
- Where a conclusion goes too far.

It saves you from writing yourself into a corner.

8/

My students know I repeat one mantra (probably too often): Before you write, build a skeleton!

Not a draft.
Not transitions.
Not ideas for prose.

A skeleton: claims, counterclaims, evidence, laid out in their bare form.

7/

In academic life, we often reverse the order.

We polish before we understand.

We write paragraphs before knowing what they’re meant to support.

The result? Beautiful sentences marching confidently toward the wrong argument.

6/

Kuper rewrites every sentence about fifteen times, not for perfection, but for clarity:

What will the reader not understand here?

That’s the heart of good writing: not showing off, but guiding someone through your thinking.

5/

In September, I spoke with Financial Times journalist Simon Kuper, who put the point even more sharply:
“I never get stuck because I have a map.

If you’re stuck, it’s because you didn’t plan.”

For him, the structure always comes first.

catherineeunicedevries.substack.com/p/etched-in-...

4/